BF:MMOFPS - Would you play? More importantly, pay?

[rombaft]

Re: BF:MMOFPS - Would you play? More importantly, pay?

Actually Planetside is pretty complex, and had a "Commander" feature (CR-5) long before BF2. You obviously have no idea what you're talking about, so it might be best for you to stop talking altogether.

Planetside is actually quite popular amongst those who know about it - but Sony never markets it.

They also implemented a model for adding expansions that blows BF2's out of the water.

have you seen the screens of that game ??????

and why did ea/dice let the support down for 124 servrs ?? I tell you why, look at my first reply .

[ypn]

Re: BF:MMOFPS - Would you play? More importantly, pay?

have you seen the screens of that game ??????

Have you played the game????? I played it for 2 years, Planetside is more complex then BF2 will ever be. Basing it off of screens is retarded, especially official ones made by SOE. Planetside came with the commander mode before BF2, players can select different certifications to specialize in certain types of weapons, vehicles and equipment. In planetside you take multiple bases on one of many continents, each base has a different significance. You have to capture certain types of bases in order to make an attack on another successful.

You have to attack the defending base through countless forms of strategy, whether moving your platoon through the back, front or from massive airborne troop drops on the base. Destroy their spawn tubes, take down the generator (power to the base) if necessary and hold the hack with a few squads while others move on to another base. If the base needs power you have some people get a certain type of vehicle to gather nano energy from a warp gate and then take it back to the base to power it up.

Huge outfits with coordination on teamspeak and ventrillo running armor columns, air assaults or troops. All this is not even half the stuff Planetside has. No I'm not a fanboy, I hate Sony because they gave up on Planetside.

BTW: I had very little lag when fighting at a single base with over 400 people fighting at it.

You have no idea what you are talking about so just stop before you make yourself look worse.

[ypn]

Re: BF:MMOFPS - Would you play? More importantly, pay?

Here is a video made by a player not by Sony, although it doesn't show a whole lot it is still better then any trailer sony will give you.

Just D/L the AD video http://marcopolo.me.uk/PS_AD.html

[Bob_the_Insane]

Re: BF:MMOFPS - Would you play? More importantly, pay?

I gave up on Planetside and got into BFV for precisely this reason, so my answer is a definate no...

Let me add that Planetside was great and in many ways better than BF (though not as pretty as BF2). But you didn't get enough extra to justify the subscription in my mind. Also paying a subscript for a game makes you feel obligated to play it at the expense of others. I like like the way you can leave BF2 alone for a while without feeling like you are wasting money...

[0likid]

Re: BF:MMOFPS - Would you play? More importantly, pay?

no way...
i mean, a few weeks ago, everyone was grumbling because EA was charging you lot $10 for a booster pack, and now, you're paying $X so u can play?
gee, i dont know...

[Boojie]

Re: BF:MMOFPS - Would you play? More importantly, pay?

I cant believe the author of this thread copied and pasted the whole thing

http://www.totalbf2.com/forums/showthread.php?t=52300

Nice sig.

[imported_Fig]

Re: BF:MMOFPS - Would you play? More importantly, pay?

I would only pay to play if modding was supported. even if it had the attention and constant updates of an mmorpg, it would still be vannila bf, which still isn't realistic enough for me.

[tk471138]

Re: BF:MMOFPS - Would you play? More importantly, pay?

this can be the future of warfare...instead of real people fighing and losing their life a more civil system of virtual warfare is created by the UN based on this system